Racist Double Standard in IMDb Credits?

I was a principal cast member of Martha & Snoop's Potluck Dinner Party for many episodes in the first two seasons, playing one of the on-camera Servers and I have the many residual pay stubs to prove it. There were six of us on-camera principal Servers, one Caucasian male, one Caucasian female, one African-American male, one African-American female, one Asian male (myself), and one Asian female (my friend Hnin Shein). Interestingly, out of the six of us, only the Caucasian male and the Caucasian female were given IMDb credit. After submitting updates with links to the full episodes many, many times to add my friend Hnin Shein and myself to the IMDb credits, my friend Hnin Shein has finally been given IMDb credits, but I still haven't so I can't help but feel singled out or punished for daring to ask us be treated the same as our Caucasian counterparts. To add insult to injury, you give credit to people who are not principal actors at all and were not credited on screen like Roberto Arturo Smith for example, who was most likely just a background extra in the audience.

...There were six of us on-camera principal Servers, one Caucasian male, one Caucasian female, one African-American male, one African-American female, one Asian male (myself), and one Asian female (my friend Hnin Shein). Interestingly, out of the six of us, only the Caucasian male and the Caucasian female were given IMDb credit. After submitting updates with links to the full episodes many, many times to add my friend Hnin Shein and myself to the IMDb credits, my friend Hnin Shein has finally been given IMDb credits...

could you please explain where is the "RACIST" standard when processing your vs. her requests? Before starting this way, perhaps you should first try her way?

The (uncredited) attribute is used to indicate that a person's name does not appear in the main or end titles of a title. A typical example is when a famous actor has an unbilled cameo appearance in a movie.

Uncredited appearances in a movie or show can be extremely difficult to verify, as they do not conform to IMDb's general principle for cast; we always follow the onscreen credits. Likewise, none of the following have any bearing on whether they were, by our definition, credited: pay stubs, call sheets, agent listings, press mentions, resumes, and their visibility on screen. The only thing that matters is the actual, onscreen credits. If their name was not on screen, but they were in the movie or show, they were uncredited.

5. For cast/acting appearances, you must be identifiable and featured on-screen in the final released cut of the title. In other words, it's not enough to have worked on a production: your scenes must be included in the final cut and it must be possible to easily identify your appearance (i.e. background work as a crowd member or a similar role where it is impossible to recognize the subject are not eligible). If you ended up on the cutting room floor, you are not eligible to be listed. We may ask you to supply evidence of this, so you should be prepared to provide photos/stills/screen grabs to verify that you are featured.

Sorry, I'm not Eddie Ramano. I'm William Ngo, the actor from the show. I meant to post this from my own account, but accidentally posted this from my account. Either you didn't read my post carefully or you're just choosing to highlight certain words but not certain other operative words and even cut out the last part which answers your question. Here they are:

"Out of the six of us, only the Caucasian male and the Caucasian female were given IMDb credit." That's the racist double standard. "After submitting updates with links to the full episodes many, many times to add my friend Hnin Shein and myself to the IMDb credits, my friend Hnin Shein has finally been given IMDb credits, but I still haven't so I can't help but feel singled out or punished for daring to ask us be treated the same as our Caucasian counterparts."

There were no screen credits for anyone, including Snoop Dogg, Martha Stewart, and the celebrity guests, yet IMDb gave credits to Snoop Dogg, Martha Stewart, the celebrity guests, the DJ, the two Caucasian Servers, my friend Hnin Shen (after I submitted the updates for us many times) and even a background extra audience member, but not me.

Ok, I guess you're right about that. After all, the names of the two hosts are in the title of the show. I see that the names of the guests are flashed right next to them before the show starts. The two hosts are also credited as Executive Producers in the opening credits and the DJ is credited on screen as well when he is introduced. The main issue I have here is that two of the Servers had their IMDb credits approved (and a third after I made many submissions for both of us) and even a background extra in the audience did, but mine were not approved.

That is incorrect.Start complying with requests.Please post the last submission number for YOUR credit only. No one else's. Yours.Supply a screegrab of you in a scene within the title.Supply the reference url.If the screengrab matches your likeness in this picture below and you supply, right here, the referencing URL, they will approve your credit.https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1736996/mediaviewer/rm1749569280

Be stubborn and they will ignore you until you comply.Remember............ Screengrab and URL. Not one or the other. BOTHPlus One Contribution Number

The six servers are Anthony Delnegro, Anna Ross, Hnin Shein, William Ngo, Brandon Brown, and Angela Maddox. The two I identified were my friend Hnin Shein and myself. Anthony Delnegro and Anna Ross, the two Caucasian Servers, were already given IMDb credits. They submitted the credits themselves, not their representation, and theirs were approved. As I stated, after submitting my friend Hnin Shein and myself many, many times, hers were finally approved, but mine still haven't been.

I let him use my laptop and he had logged into his account and didn't sign out. I wasn't aware that I was logged on to his account when I made that post. I can't say who else lets him use their computer or that he lets use his computer. Sorry for the confusion.

The various members of the IMDb site authorities do not have the same privilege levels necessarily, so seemingly some have access to tools that others do not. I'm aware of maybe one employee who sometimes reports that a given thing is not possible just because he himself does not have the internal credentials to pull it off. I'm not sure if he merely relaying the remarks from a superior officer or if he sincerely believes in particular limitations. As for how helpful or competent a person, this can actually vary with a person's workload, workflow and mood; so the stars are not always at the top of their respective games, and people who often disappoint sometimes perform spectacularly. In general, the IMDb staff will try to give the best response that they are so capable of giving. Sometimes threads will receive multiple replies from multiple employees, since they do not all necessarily have the same expertise and access privileges, or just due to revolving work shifts. The founder of IMDb is responsible (to a degree) for all this stuff, and when he replies, it usually very helpful or otherwise a clarification of limitations of the technology presently available to the staff. I do believe he will refrain from directly addressing problems for which one of his fellows or subordinates have much more expertise, though.

Have all these persons in the pictures/documents agreed that you present them with the thread title ”Racist Double Standard”? This is a public forum after all and the accusation feels very far-fetched. Or should I say, a bit silly even.

It’s perfectly fine to challenge IMDb for movie credits (or the production company who apparently didn’t give any actual on-screen credits to certain actors), but there’s a better way to handle these issues. ”Uncredited” credits are always handled differently than the ”credited” ones.

The two Caucasian actors are good friends of mine and I have spoken to all of them about this, yes. The production compay didn't give on-screen credits to anyone, including Snoop Dogg, Martha Stewart, the celebrity guests, and the six of us Servers and yet IMDb approved the credits of the two Caucasian servers (and my friend Hnin Shein after I submitted the updates for us many times) but not mine.

William.Your assertion of Racism is baseless and crass at best.You have asserted that another person was playing "Dumb". Crass action again.None of us are employees. All of us were trying to help. Lighten up!You made 23 submissions on July 11. None of those are organized as to what they reference.The "Proof" you provided did not state here whether it was a link and a screenshot, or just a link.Screenshots with a link for a reference is preferred. And in this case almost assuredly mandatory.That means interaction of your acting in the role. This is the proof that is needed when a role has no onscreen accreditation. All the above shots appear to be behind the scene photos or possibly selfie shots.Suggest you apologize for the racist remark statement in general and a sorry to MAthePA would be nice.

IMDb will process any and all "PROPERLY SUBMITTED" contributions for accreditation.Keyword here is "Properly". They absolutely and positively do not choose who or who not is included based on race. Please comply with what is requested to approve your submissions.

That being said it would help the staff if you were assign each one of those submission numbers above with a point of reference that it addresses.

And I do hope that they are not repeated submissions for the same credit. That only slows down processing.

Well, when the two Caucasian Servers were given IMDb credit, but the other four were not and my repeated update submissions were denied, I see a double standard. Your failure to see that is myopic and crass at best. I didn't know that MAthePA is not an IMDb employee but he quoted some of my words and highlighted some of them, but ignored or omitted others, so I questioned whether he simply didn't read my words carefully or if he was being willfully ignorant. Blowing my words out of proportion is crass action again on your part.

I made multiple submissions because I was in multiple episodes and submitted updates to each episode individually. Jeorj asked me what the reference numbers were for the updates I submitted, so I listed them (presumably for IMDb staff to see and reference in their system). I wasn't asked to organize them in any way and IMDb staff can see what they reference because they are reference numbers and that is their purpose. Your insinuation that I failed to properly provide the reference numbers is baseless and again crass at best. I had submitted links to the episodes in my update submissions and it is only here that I am able to post photos. I posted pictures of my residual pay stubs above that clearly show I was a Principal Performer who received thousands of dollars in residuals for multiple episodes. I included the pictures of us behind the scenes for further proof that I worked on the set and for a visual reference of the six Servers and our racial makeup.

I also did not make any racist remarks. I questioned whether the double standard at play here is racist because the two Servers out of six that were given IMDb credits happen to be the two Caucasian ones. All of my update submissions were "PROPERLY SUBMITTED", key word "properly". It's interesting that you presume to know each and every IMDb employee and the reasoning behind how they subjectively "choose who or who not is included". You ask me to "comply with what is requested" is if you are an IMDb employee and as if you know that I didn't provide what is requested. Again, I'm pretty sure the can find what my reference numbers reference because that is the point of reference numbers. No, they are not repeated submissions for the same credit. IMDb allows a submission to be repeated only every 14 days, so I have to wait 14 days before resubmitting each credit.

If you will not make things easier for staff, and all you want to do is push the idea that your assertions are correct, then by all means make your credit submissions as difficult to approve as possible.

There is no double standard.There is only a stubbornness present on your part to comply with submission procedure.

By all means, have at it. Keep up the attitude. Make people unwilling to help.I tried.All you have done is argue.Do as asked. Or Don't.I happen to be in the industry.I'm on your side.But not if your gonna be a..................................CheersEd

Again, your baseless accusations are crass. I haven't made my credit submissions difficult to approve. As I have stated repeatedly, after my submitting updates many times for my friend Hnin and I to receive IMDb credit, I managed to get her credited for 21 episodes but I haven't been credited for a single episode which is very suspect. I have included links to the episodes and I came on here to post my pay stubs.

I guess your incorrect grammar got something right for once. Yes, I have been very stubborn in submitting my updates many times, complying with submission procedure every single time. That is how I got my friend Hnin credited, but the fact that I still haven't been credited doesn't make sense.

I came on here because I didn't understand why my submission updates were being denied, why my updates for my friend were finally approved, but my updates for myself still haven't been. I posted my pay stubs so that IMDb staff will approve my updates. I didn't come on here to start a flame war with a troll who has trouble with basic spelling, grammar, and reading comprehension. I have been acting professionally for 11 years now and I'm an Emmy voter. Those of us who actually work in in the industry know how frustrating it can be dealing with IMDb inaccuracies and inconsistencies in submission approvals. So, if you're going to be a dumba__CheersWilliam

Sir, you have no reason to get hostile. You have accused the IMDB of having a double standard and have been calling people names. This is violation of IMDb's code of conduct on this platform. Please refrain from this activity. Everyone is trying to help you. All you keep doing is arguing instead of doing as asked. You even admitted this method worked for another persons credits.

Now, with that being said, I can see why you may be having issues. You use two names. Wu and Ngo. IMDb will obviously be hesitant to credit you in an uncredited role because of the dual names used. It would not be an issue if you used one name and then changed completely for good to another name. But you have bounced back and forth for all 11 rears of your career. Yes you have provided call sheets for a project as shown above using Ngo, but if you would provide all the data asked for above, they should approve your credits. To group them without references for each contribution number is not going to result in getting your credits approved.

There are many people in the industry that get paid by their legal name and work under a stage name. IMDb does not know what name to use for your uncredited work.Please understand their dilemma.

Unless your contributions are precise on uncredited work they cannot approve your submissions.And the responses I have made are by no means trolling.Trolls do not take this much time and effort.Please don't call me a Troll again.Thanks

Actually, you got hostile and called me names starting with your first comment on my post. You repeatedly called me "crass" and ultimately called me an "a__". A violation of IMDb code of conduct indeed. As I have stated repeatedly, I submitted my friend Hnin and I together. In other words, I used the same exact (appropriate and including all necessary info) method for both her and myself and yet she got credited for 21 episodes and I haven't been credited for a single episode. I did not submit any screenshots for her because there is no such screenshot to be found. Likewise, Anthony Delnegro and Anna Ross did not submit any screenshots because there are no such screenshots to be found, but their credits got approved. This is the double standard I'm talking about.

I know IMDb staff don't need me to include episode names next to the reference numbers here, but just to satisfy you:

As you can see in the pictures I posted above, I received residual checks for several of the Season 2 episodes. You can match the episode names in my update submissions with the episode names on my residual checks.

You are missing screengrabs and a url or in lieu of that, watermarked screenshots, to match each contribution number. Reason for this is corroboration. You can get paid for work done and end up edited out in the final cut. They want Ironclad proof.Please provide all that I asked for. They can't deny your submissions if you provide what I suggest.

Uncredited contributions have a higher level of proof to avoid fraudulent actor page padding. This is why, that what I say will help you get this through.Don't do it, and your asking for an automatic rejection.

Again, Anthony Delnegro and Anna Ross didn't have to provide screenshots before they had their credits approved because there are no such screenshots. Background extra audience member Roberto Arturo Smith didn't have to provide screenshots before his credit was approved because there was definitely no such screenshot for him. I did'n't have to provide screenshots for my friend Hnin before I got her credits approved because there are no such screenshots. My issue here is being singled out. The pay stubs I posted above that clearly state "Principal Performer" and showing that I received thousands of dollars in residuals for multiple episodes in Season 2 prove that I was a Principal Actor on multiple episodes of the show. If I had been cut out of the show with no credits, I would not be receiving residuals. I am also an Emmy voter and was in Boy Erased with Nicole Kidman, Russell Crowe, Joel Edgerton, Lucas Hedges, and Troye Sivan, which received two Golden Globe nominations. I definitely have a lot more credits than my friend Hnin and the background extra audience member Roberto Arturo Smith. I don't need to pad my actor page.

I explained thisOne more time.You are using two names.Your submissions are at a level of higher scrutiny because of this.Does not matter what everybody else has to do.If you were using one name exclusively, I don't believe you would need to do this.Its not you need to pad. No one said this. Editors do this to all uncredited credits because of rampant page padding.

I'm currently working with staff on an individual that has close to 200 bogus credits. It is happening a lot. So scrutiny levels have risen in the last couple of years. YOU ARE NOT being singled out. Just do what is asked. You can make this so simple.Yeah, it's a lot of work, but your credits will be approved.

Not reading anymore of your replies.Just like the old NIKE slogan says..........."Just Do It!"

Thanks for your message. I can see that you've added those credits without the (uncredited) attribute, though this thread confirms that these roles weren't credited on screen. Please try resubmitting the items with the (uncredited) attribute and link to this thread in the explanation field for our data editors to review. Please let me know if you have any further problems.

The others had their credits approved without the Uncredited attribute despite their roles not being credited on screen. It's not a big deal to me to have these credits on IMDb. It's the double standard that I take issue with.

William Ngo, we can mitigate the discrepancy for the case at hand and make sure all the credits information conforms to IMDb policy, but we probably will never have an explanation for the problem. Hopefully that is good enough for you. This is not a transparent system.

IMDb tracks each contributor's accuracy over time and if any contributor repeatedly submits data which is inaccurate or which violates our policies, their contributions will require increasing levels of additional proof in order to be processed.

I don't repeatedly submit date that is inaccurate or violates your policies. Each year, I receive an e-mail thanking me for my many contributions. I see tons of background extras who are not given on-screen credit but are given IMDb credits without proof. Sometimes, those aren't corrected after I submit the corrections many, many times. I've had an IMDb employee tell me I have to show proof that they are not credited on screen (instead of them having to show proof that they are credited on screen). So, I see a double standard at play and IMDb employees contradicting themselves and choosing to twist the rules as they like instead of following the rules as stated.